It was suggested to me recently, that TKD kata is far different to Karate kata, in respect to training methods, applications, bunkai etc,
Having seen TKD kata being performed both here and in Oz, it seems to me that TKD kata is more of a "drill" or training aid, rather than being open to applications, as in most karate kata.
We haven't really discussed alot of Tae-Kwon-Do on here - Is this because it's considered more of a "sport" than Karate?
Would be interested to hear views on both these subjects.

Tom.

When TKD was first created it actually used the Shotokan Karate katas. They binned these to get away from the Japanese influence and created their own, based pretty much on the layout of the Pinans/Heians. As the founders of TKD had studied Shotokan they got the Shotokan understanding of kata at the time (the 50's I think). The understanding of bunkai in TKD as in Shotokan was essentially non-existant. Later TKD split into two broad factions. The breakaway group then devised their own kata, at least in part simply to make themselves different.

So now you have the two broad factions in TKD, the WTF & the ITF (the names may have changed now for all I know).

As regards understanding of kata, its all chinese whispers, or in this case japanese whispers followed by korean whispers followed by even more korean whispers.

Mike

I would think it's not just TKD kata that appear more like drills... but I've only seen one TKD class. The taigyoku and gekisai series seem much the same to me.

Its only a drill if thats how you treat it.

We have a set bunkai for gekisai, and we are always coming up with our own for the same kata and all of the other katas.There are so many self defence applications in all kata, you just have to find them. The other day I had 10 and 11 year old kids coming up with some great ideas, they also came up with some ordinary ideas, but at least they are starting to think about their katas as more than just a drill.

I know there are heaps of clubs out there that do kata just as a drill or to score points in the next tournament, because these clubs do the katas this way doesnt mean that the katas dont have practical self defence applications in them.

At Igk tournaments and at higher grade gradings you are expected to show at least three applications to the kata you have just performed. Why dont they do this at Nas? It would then force these sport karate guys to delve a little deeper into their kata and possibly learn a whole lot more.

Rocket

P.S. Sorry to get back to the same old debate about bunkai.

Nah I have to disagree there. I've seen video of competitions where they have a bunkai section and mostly it's athletic flashy stuff which looks good for scoring points. I also think that practice for it would tend towards rehearsal for all parties involved getting it right rather than the "attacker" making it harder as the defenders get better.

In my limited experience the TKD forms are generally the same or similar to Shotokan kata though it seems from reading this thread that only applies to some TKD schools.


Mick

I studied the Taeguk series for a little over four years, and yes - I was quite surprised the similarities between them and karate.

The Taeguk is a sequential series in the similar layout as taikyoku shodan (which we also used), and gradually increasing in complexity, but always symmetrical. The reason I was given for this was 'to practice the technique with both left and right sides of your body', and yes, they were used in gradings to test basic technique so could be argued as being a 'drill or training aid'. However from about taeguk 5 upwards there are a wealth of applications in them. Sadly this was never even mentioned let alone studied.

They are not 'flashy' patterns in the slightest, and the school never did any good at NAS using them. Im pretty sure this leads to the less informed thinking they arent anything useful, but really I feel the opposite. Just pure techniques and no show.... what a pity its wasted.

Hi Matt,

I don't know the kata you mention from TKD although I can tell you there were 12 Taikyoku kata created for Okinawan stuents that were supposed to be able to be used by all Okinawan karate schools. They never actually seemed to become popular although some used the first one and the pattern to create their own drills.

The ideas was to promote a progressive structure of all fundamental karate techniues from single to complex applications for beginner and intermediate students. Many don't see the value in the Taikyoku series and certainly 12 is too many but they are worth studying. I use the first one as a teaching tool and find it a valuable asset.

Cheers,
Boz

Hi Mick, when we do the applications at a grading or tourament, the grading panel or judging panel pick what part of the kata they want you to show an application for and they pick your partner for you. Sometimes they will want three different applications to the one part of the kata using three different sized partners. This means that you have to really understand your kata, you cannot rehearse this with a set partner.

It would take a lot longer to run a kata tournament, but it will sort out who really knows what they are doing. The hardest thing though would be to find a enough capable judges. At a black belt grading if we have time we have to demonstrate 25 applications to Seeinchin kata, and once again the panel picks your partner and the parts of the kata they want to see. Fortunately we usually run out of time so we only have to demonstrate about 5 or 6 applications.

Rocket

Alright, so I went looking for videos online of TKD kata - didn't find any, and then got side tracked cos that's what I do best, and I'm getting the idea that TKD was developed:
1) mostly from Japanese MA,
2) and then modified to look as un-Japanese as possible (since modern TKD came out just after the end of WWII?),
3) to *look* like a serious alternative to karate without enough depth to make it anything other than sport style?

Yes? No? Anyone?

Yes, although I believe the emphasis on kicking is indigineous to Korea.




Spot on.



Harsh, but not entirely unfair. That said, maybe the TKD founders simply discovered some home truths about the karate they had learnt (ie. it lacked depth too). Logically there was no reason that they shouldn't completely rewrite the kata. Although TKD forms may feel like they have less depth than karate kata, their understanding of the movements is no less sophisticated than most karatekas understanding of their kata.

Mike

TKD gets a bagging and has an appalling reputation - mostly due to the US latching onto it and applying the (and please excuse my language) "Yank Bullshit" factor to it. Ridiculous concepts like 90 day black belt courses and 'leadership programs' (for an extra fee of course) where they teach weapons they've only just learned themselves have pretty much destroyed its integrity.

Like karate TKD has a long history, but was reinvented to ensure its survival. The Japanese invaded Korea quite a bit over the centuries and therein lies the reason for its similarities and the substantial Japanese influence. The 'de-Japanesing' of TKD was intentional to try to restore some of its origins. Real TKD has self defence as a fundamental aspect. We were assessed on how we responded to various attack scenarios. Unfortunately with the formation of the WTF and they becoming the 'official' body the emphasis has become solely on sport and competitions.

This is just my understanding and someone like Dale would probably be able to give a more thorough rebuttal to the comments, and hopefully correct any misconceptions I may have....

As a side - why is it wrong if the kata were in fact japanese? Doesnt karate contain a lot of Chinese influences?

Question for the tkd experts, is there a martial arts that was designed especially as a counter to tae kwon do? Was talking to a friend earlier today and they mentioned about something like that but they weren't sure exactly what it was/ could be.

I liked the katas the TKD people were doing at NAS, and I couldn't really see any similarities between theirs and ours other than similar "signifying" moves (like the diamond hand position at the start of kanku dai - i think that's it) and similar patterns (like a kick, punch combo done in a similar pattern but with the styles own kicks and strikes used instead) in some cases. *shrug* if the different karate clubs can alter the katas to their suit there own sylabus, don't really see why it should matter if tkd should do the same.

Mitten?
Would this elusive Martial Art be Hapkido?
This seems to be a fairly modern korean art - but owes alot to Aikido it seems.
It's known as "The Organic Art" in some circles.
Anyone back me up on this?

Generally speaking Hapkido is based on Aikido in the same way that Taekwondo is based on Karate. What little I've seen seemed a bit brute force-ish compared to Aikido, more like Ju-Jitsu really. And of course, mixed in with the trademark Korean kicking techniques.

Mike

Mike - what makes you say TKD was based on karate?
Influenced by certainly, but not based on.

Why would there be any MA designed specifically as a counter to some other MA? At the core of most styles is a philosophy of defence rather than aggression. (I assert here that anything different is usually a product of the teacher rather than the style)

There are people who can't agree whether or not karate is a cut-down version of kungfu so why wouldn't there be people who think taekwondo is rebadged karate? You can look at some schools of TKD and be forgiven for thinking it's Shotokan Karate, and other schools which bear little resemblance except for apparently having a fetish for punching and kicking each other.


Mick

No, I believe 'based on' is not putting the case too strongly.

During the Japanese occupation of Korea, many aspects of Korean culture were harshly repressed. The Japanese invaders attempted to 'Japanise' Korea. One of many aspects of this repression was the banning of Korean martial arts. Many Korean martial arts literally died out during that time. There were undoubtedly some survivors, but not as many as the practitioners of today's Korean arts would often like us to believe. The only martial arts that Koreans were allowed to practice were Japanese ones. The chief protagonist in the creation of Taekwondo in (I believe) the late 1940's / early 50's was General Choi - who I believe was a 2nd dan in Shotokan. I don't know any details of his junior colleagues but I understand they were pretty much in the same boat. When these guys created their own martial art it was naturally based very much on what they'd already studied. In the early days they practiced the karate kata, and specifically the Shotokan kata! Now if that doesn't prove the case I don't know what does. The development of their own forms (poomse) only came later. Given the understandably vehement backlask against all things Japanese they deliberately did not stress the Japanese origins of their art. Over time they sought to distance themselves as much as possible from that origin - coming up with new kata/poomse is an excellent example of this process. No doubt this was reflected in many aspects of Korean culture during the 50's. The culture flowered after the liberation of the country (in the South anyway). In areas where it had been irrevocably destroyed it was simply reinvented - at least that's how it happened in the martial arts.

Understandably the practitioners of Korean arts were highly vociferous about denying their Japanese origins, this has naturally bled over into the beliefs of TKD practitioners in the west. But nowadays more and more of them are at peace with their heritage and accept the truth of the matter.

Look at the stances, look at the blocks, look at the punches, even the kicks to a degree - they're all pretty much the same as Shotokan. The similarities are far more marked than between Karate and any system of Kung Fu I've ever seen - even though we know there is a definite Kung Fu / Karate link.

I'm no expert on any Korean art, but all this information is in the public domain so don't take my word for it, dig around and see if you can verify it for yourself.

Mike

Please note I am not referring in any way to WTF Olympic style TKD here. As far as I am aware that was contrived purely to be an Olympic sport. Doesnt hurt when the Vice President of the IOC during the Seoul games was Korean either



Likewise, the Japanese - a very elitist and racist culture - are no doubt keen to have it seen that their cousins in Korea are merely practicing a clone of their own style, and loudly spread the story to all and sundry. Hardly proof in itself.


I have - I've studied them . Thats a tough one Mike - one side would argue that theres not really that many ways to punch someone other than with a fist, and human movement limits the variety of ways to block something (I found there was a greater emphasis on evasion than blocking - but that may just be my school). They could say that this is a remnant of the Japanese influence, whilst the other side would argue that its all just semantics and naive attempts to differentiate. Maybe the strikes are an indication of the Japanese influence yes - but the kicks? I've seen nothing in karate that remotely compares with TKD's kicks.

If you compare the tournament sparring (okay - talking WTF here.... I know I said I wouldnt ) you'd notice similarities with Kyokushin (barring the protective gear). No direct strikes to the face, full contact, go for the 'knock down/knock out'. In fact Mas Oyama was Korean - maybe Kyokushin is based on TKD?? jokes all, settle down

I'm not denying the strong influence at all here, that is fact - just the concept that TKD is a clone of karate.... to say that denies that there was ever the arts of Subak or Taekyon (definately Chinese in origin) to which TKD owes if not its foundation then certainly a sizeable part of its heritage and influence.



Indeed - there's strong cases for both sides. Like Mick said you would have to go on a school by school basis and just as Im sure there are places where you would think you were watching a shotokan class, there are places where you would find very little similarities at all.

Enjoying the discussion and learning a lot.

This from Wikpedia for interests sake.... doesnt seem to prove one way or the other



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taekwondo

Hi Guys and Girls

Firstly let me apologise for not being around the forum for a while. Work has been really hectic and my club opened another branch and of course that took priority.

With that said, it looks like I could get an argument on my opinions here. This topic really touches on some nerves in both the Karate world as well as the TKD world but the facts are pretty simple.

Whilst Taekwondo people will tell you that TKD is over 2,000 years old. The facts are that Taekwondo heritage can be traced back that far but not TKD itself. Taekwondo is really only about 40 years old and the actual name of the art more like 30 years old. It is not a copy of Karate but styles such as Shotokan had considerable influence when it was established.

There is proof that Koreans studied martial arts for thousands of years (there are even mural paintings in ruins of the royal tombs of the Koguryo dynasty, founded 37B.C.) However the arts practiced were not Taekwondo but certainly had an influence when TKD was created.

After liberation from the Japanese invasion on August 15, 1945, those with an aspiration to revitalize the traditional martial arts of Korea taught their followers, and at last, on September 16, 1961, the Korea Taekwondo Association was established.

On February 25, 1962, the Korea Taekwondo Association became the 27th affiliate to join the Korea Amateur Sports Association. On October 9, 1963, Taekwondo became an official event for the first time in the 44th National Athletic Meet. Its great leaps in the development of competition rules and protective equipment started with that meet.

It wasnt until the 1970's that a number of practitioners got together in Seoul and decided on a basic platform for the art that combined the skills of individual schools. Taekwondo made its way to the world sport through the 1st World Taekwondo Championships held in Seoul, Korea in May 1973 with participation of 19 countries. At the Seoul meet held on May 28, 1973 on the occasion of the championships, representatives of those countries established the World Taekwondo Federation (WTF).

There is often a confusion because of the heavy Japanese influence through Japan invading Korea. Koreans were allowed to train in traditional Japanese arts before they were allowed to revive their own. So styles such as shotokan do have a heavy influence on TKD because many of the old masters studied japanese arts and the most popular of these was shotokan. Others studied korean arts such as Tang Soo Do, Oh Do Kwan and Jidokwan.

My own master started in shotokan as a child and learn t Jodokwan before taekwondo was created.

The WTF was created to combine all the groups as well as create a national sport for people that needed to regain national pride. Many of the traditional techniques were taken out and an emphasis was placed on kicking because of safety concerns. Remember that this was a time of full contact and no padding, so the perception of the way TKD was viewed was very important. I think they have been pretty successful in reaching the goals that they set.

As for Kata (TKD people call them patterns), many of us started out learning the shotokan patterns because of our masters heritage and the styles priority on sparring. Over the years a number of efforts were made to have all TKD practitioners adopt the one set of patterns but it was only in recent years that this has been successful with the taegeuk patterns.

Hope this is of some help and doesn't simply cause more confusion.

Such a hassle when real life gets in the way. Nice to see you back again.


With luck, you will That's how we learn stuff!


Most of the historical accounts I have been reading say that TKD was named in 1955 (April 11th, according to one account) and that General Choi had had most of his training in Taek Kyon (foot fighting), starting Shotokan at age 19, and attaining bb within two years "of concentrated training". The General was also anti-Japanese, I guess you'd call him - he was expelled from school when he was 12 "for agitating against the Japanese authorities who were in control of Korea" - so there is probably some truth in the theory that the Koreans were trying to remove the Japanese influence from the style?


It's like they gathered up all the bits that had managed to survive from lots?some? styles and bundled them together...


I am guessing this is when TKD became sports oriented?


This is cool. It's almost like watching a unique style being born.

*footnote*
*I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, just collecting tidbits from reading here and there - teach me something! *

Having been both a TKD and karate practitioner I can say that they are very different styles in kata and kumite. The reason is based on ancient origins apparently. The Koreans are said to have developed a fighting style that was largely based on high level kicks because their opponents were riding horses. The high level "flashy" kicks are supposed to be loosely based on the ancient style and designed to remove a warrior from his horse. The Japanese, on the other hand, like to fight on level ground, so to speak.

I guess if the basic fighting style has this purpose then it follows that the kata/patterns in TKD may look a little less realistic. I generally find that Karate kata are based on a solid basics foundation while TKD patterns are more athletic. Not being very athletic, but reasonably strong.....I prefer Karate Kata!

Gong Girl.

Fair enough, but I have to say I've personally not heard this from Japanese sources. My opinions and conclusions don't draw on that quarter. I have no bias either way - I'm not a practitioner or advocate of either art (although I've seen and done both) and I have no emotional attachment to either.



Its a fair point that there are only so many ways to move a human body. But I've never seen a kung fu style that uses the same rising block, downward block, inward block, outward block and knifehand block as Karate - even though Karate is known to be descended at least in part from Kung Fu. But these are the basic blocks of TKD, virtually identical to those of Shotokan. Likewise with stances. In fact I think its fair to say that the blocks, strikes and stances of Shotokan are rather closer to those of TKD than they are to Shotokan's precursor, Shorin Ryu.



Agreed, I would never dream of arguing that TKD's kicks are influenced by Karate. If anything, it can be argued that the modern repetoire of kicks in Karate is actually influenced by TKD. I'm not aware of the existence of the reverse roundhouse kick in Karate before the 1970's, or perhaps 60's. The array of flashy kicks most martial arts involve nowadays is surely the legacy of the Korean arts in general, not just TKD.



I agree that some of Korea's former martial heritage must have rubbed off on the modern arts. I don't imagine it was all completely destroyed. And I'm aware that in the early days of TKD, TKD was in fact an umbrella term that encompassed a number of activities. I don't doubt that some of the early 'TKD' practitioners were in fact practising at least fragments of arts that had been handed down in Korea for generations. But for whatever reasons (probably in part General Choi's political influence) these did not, as far as I can see, strongly influence the TKD that most people practice today. At least in the UK there is not a great deal of difference between WTF & ITF TKD and many of the modern Karate styles. The same appears to be true from the limited contact I've had with TKD people from the states and from Korea. For better or worse, most TKD is the rather shallow olympic flicky kicky stuff.

If there are people out there doing something that they call TKD but has much more depth than that, then I think that's great. In just the same way, I practice something that I believe has much more depth than most Karate, but our art is still tarred with same name.

Mike

P.S. For the record, don't think I'm having a go at TKD. If you want a fun dynamic sport then TKD is great. And if someone asked me where to go to learn good high kicking skills then I'd send them to a TKD club.

Never thought you were.

My lament and the reason I stopped training was my school did a dramatic change toward the American way after the owners visited there on a 'fact finding' mission. They came back with all these great ideas and it all went down the tube (the school head threatening to punch me out in an unrelated incident not knowing I was a student didnt help either). Im afraid this is the way its going much the same way that Karate is becoming taken over by massive commercial ventures.

Most people when they think TKD think WTF, or more specifically the WTF style 'flicky kicky' fighting... Given their total control over the olympics and refusal to accept anyone from any other 'branch' this perception will only grow. Thank the gods Karate was never accepted.

Karate and TKD. one barely 90 years old the other about 40 years old. From all accounts one created as PE for kids the other as a sport. Doesnt look good when you put it like that does it

Having visited two schools in my area (both within a mile of each other) both teach "Freestyle Karate" which we`ve touched on before, which, having both watched lessons then participated in - leads me to think they`re teaching a mixture of TKD and Karate whilst leaving out the Kate/Bunkai.

The Instructer told me that Kata as a teaching tool was next to useless - and it wasn`t what the students wanted.
But knowing where the school was, and knowing some of the students personally - I can well believe it.

Going back to to my original idea here, I`ve been reading up on the history of Okinawan Martial Arts and It`s been suggested that the kicking elements were originally from Thailand and Korea. Any advance on this?

And a question for Gong Girl... If High-Level kicks were originally developed to be utilised against mounted opponents, why use a kick?
Surely the best method would be to dismount the enemy and deal with them on your own terms?
Look at ancient history, the mounted knights of Europe were only half as effective once unhorsed.
With abit of poetic licence, you could maybe apply this to the mounted Samurai of japan maybe? ( but thats a different thread entirely! )

there is a magazine published in the united states called Classical Fighting Arts. the articles are teriffic, very well researched etc. anyway, a few years back an 6 part research article was written by a 6th degree black belt in TKD who happened to also be a professor of history and he wrote a detailed thesis on this very subject.

basicaly he was highly critical of the way the koreans had abandond the shotokan kata and moved on to try to develop their own poomsai (korean for kata). since there were several organisations of TKD all competing to come out on top, they all developed there own forms. in the article he suggests that moving away from the original shotokan these organisations fragmented and destroyed the original meanings thus robbing TKD of a structured, traditional format of kata training.

i can't remember the rest of what was written but google classical fighting arts and you should be able to find the magazine.

on another note, taekwondo over the last 50 years has evolved far more spectacularly than karate has. has anyone else noticed this? if you look at the original book on TKD - called Korean Karate, there was an emphasis on equal punching and kicking. go into most TKD clubs and most now only kick. im not saying this is bad or anything like that, its just an observation.

I find myself unable to comment on the history of kicking in Okinawan arts, other than to say that it generally done low down without the modern emphasis on athleticism.

Mike